Hey thanks for the question. 

In working with customers I have not seen this approach before. Including sub-processor information in LeanIX could help improve visibility into vendor risks and data compliance by linking it directly to your applications, but it can add maintenance overhead and complexity—so it’s most valuable if you actively use LeanIX for vendor or risk management rather than just record-keeping. I assume your scenario is to say:

A clear way to model that in LeanIX would be:

• Vendor → modeled as a Provider Fact Sheet (the company you contract with).

• Product → modeled as an Application or IT Component Fact Sheet, depending on how you categorize vendor-delivered solutions.

• Sub-processor → modeled as another Provider Fact Sheet, linked to the main vendor.

Then create a custom relation (e.g., “Runs On” or “Uses Sub-Processor”) between the vendor’s Provider Fact Sheet and the sub-processor’s Provider Fact Sheet.
This structure lets you:

• Link the vendor’s product (Application) to its Provider,

• Show that the Provider relies on another Provider (the sub-processor),

• And report or visualize the full dependency chain in LeanIX.

However it truly depends on what you’re trying to solve for. Often times this is a question on a survey “sub processor used”.